[MickeyVee]

Not sure I agree with that.. HD800 with McIntosh driving and Deadmou5 or Morgan Page playing is absolute killer!! I listen to bery little classical music.
 
Quote:

   
I definitely think Sennheiser designed the HD800 specifically for Classical music.  And IME this is where the HD800 shines at his best . Mods and EQ help to transform tnhe HD800 in a more forgiving headphone. (I currently use light mods with mine ) 

 

[MickeyVee]

HE-1000 is about the only onter HP I'd consider now. I think that I'm turning onto a One Headphone Huy and it would be the HD800 or HE1000.  Since I already have the HD800, choice is made. {for now

}
 
Quote:

Professionally, I can't be without an HD 800, so it's the most important headphone to me in my work.
But personally, I'd take the HE-1000 for listening pleasure.

 

[Sorrodje]

Never said the hd800 was not good for a lot of different musics. Just said I thought it was designed especially for classical and shines at his best with that music.

I'm on my phone. Will be back later to explain why I think the hd800 fr is that suitable for classical and overally acoustic music IMO.

 

[gnomen]

I have been deciding on the best DAC for my HD800s if choosing from the models available to me here in the UK.  Today I auditioned the HDVD800 and the Hugo.  Posting here to add my experiences to those of others in case it is helpful to others making the same decision.
 
The HDVD800 was disappointing.  I found it 'darker' and less resolving than I had expected.  It is also smooth, and it might be appreciated by those who consider the HD800 too bright (I don't).  The comparison is with my long term main system DAC, the Weiss DAC-202.   It did have good bass energy/solidity but only fractionally more so, if at all, than the Weiss or the Hugo.  Thirty minutes and a wide range of material (pop, classical, small ensemble, large orchestra + choir, etc.) there was no contest.  Not the DAC for me.
 
By comparison the Hugo was amazing.  Very similar to the Weiss -- perhaps just the tiniest bit coarser on the high notes on some (and only some) tracks.  It might even be the streamer we were using at the hi-fi store.  I will post an update if I get the chance to audition the Hugo on my own specific system.  What the Hugo does have in spades is 'listenability'  -- I kept getting involved in the music and had to remind myself to move on to the next test.  I also found myself nodding and foot-tapping -- there is something wonderful, but a bit subliminal, about the way the Hugo invites you to engage with the music.  I suspect it has a lot to do with initial attack and superb timing but I defer to others in explaining the causes.  Let's face it, a DAC you do not want to give back is the sort of DAC makes you want to put your money down and take home.
 
Also auditioned the TT which, as others have said, is marginally better on some material.  Just a tad more resolving and also seems to smooth some of the aforementioned slight edge to some high frequencies.  The difference is very small -- small enough to ask yourself whether you would notice it once the new kit settled in and if so is it worth paying double the price?  I am wondering if the little bit of extra smoothness could be equalled in the Hugo with some USB filtering ...
 
Bottom line: looks like there is a Hugo in my future ... just need to digest all this -- and also see how the Mojo discussion settles, before making a move.
 
Big thanks to Marc at Audio T in Reading for arranging the afternoon and providing insights.  Recommended.
 
Cheers
 
Robert

 

[joespride]

Some Schiit on order.................I am now awaiting delivery of the new Bimby (Schiit Bifrost Multibit), will be comparing it to the Havana to determine which stays and which goes
 
should see it next week (I Hope)................The little Bimby will have to do alot in order to unseat the Havana

 

[Wildcatsare1]

Just out of interest has anyone done a detailed comparison of the HD800 vs HD800 modified with the anaxilus? I am certain it will make a difference to the sound but I am as sure that means it will be an substantial or significant improvement.

On the one hand I fully respect the work that Tyll and his associates have done and they are to be applauded wholeheartedly. On the other hand is it probable that Sennheiser with their R&D budget had missed something so significant and which could be sorted with such a small adjustment?

Maybe I need to visit the craft shop...........

I just did the mod from Innerfidelity, it was quite easy to do. The template and directions are excellent you should give it a go!

Still listening, though my initial impressions are very positive.

 

[Taowolf51]

  I'm really sick of seeing the word "analytical" being used to describe the HD 800 or other neutral gear in general on many forums as of late. The word "analytical" has almost been run to the ground, that it carries a negative connotation more than ever. I get the feeling that the word analytical is now synonymously used as the word sterile.
 
Your 'analytical,' equals my 'resolving.' Being able to resolve shouldn't be a point of complaint...ever. Ehh, whatever, not sure where I was going with this. Lost my train of thought.

 
Eh, that's just the direction the headphone market is going now. People don't like treble anymore, and it really shows in many modern headphones. -50db at 13kHz? Holy crap! I work very hard to keep my ears in good shape so my range of hearing doesn't go down, I'd personally rather not lob 6+kHz off my range through a dark headphone. But, tastes differ, so it's now hard to find a headphone that doesn't sound like it has a big empty hole in the top end.
 

lol zoom. Here's my take on hd800 in plain english. There is almost no extension on hd800 that relates one note to the next, making it involving and what gives rythmic flow to music. It's a stop and go more so then a lot of headphones. It's not musical compared to hd650 and Nighthawks. It's flat and accurate I suppose which mimics live stage performance more so than other headphones, but is still not upto par as a real live performance. Soundstage is still not good enough compared to a real live performance. Since hd800 is very flat and very fast and stop and go, the imaging is very good, but the big picture of music, which is flow and rythem is taken away.

To make it simple. When I play a music on hd800 - it sounds like there is a guitar playing in one side of the room, drums in the other side of the room, vocals on another room, and piano on another room and you are on the bottom room hearing different sounds in different rooms.

With musical heqdphones, it sounds like all is playing in one room together and you are in the same room. Biggest problem with hd800 is it lacks rythem and it is not able to connect musical instruments together in a groove and soulful way.

it doesn't extend enough.

 

So you don't like the fact that the HD800 has quick decay and good instrument separation? And you prefer a more syrupy reverberant presentation? That's fine, but do know that if you have a problem with decay with the HD800's, your problem is with the recording and not the headphones. The HD800's quick decay and speed allows it to present the actual decay of the instruments accurately rather than adding decay on top and changing/lengthening the decay of the instrument. I'm guessing the reason you liken it to a "live performance" is that you're referencing performances that are done in rooms that are not properly acoustically treated, and so the reverberations of the headphones are reminding you of the reverberations of the room. And that's fine. When I used to perform, there were times where I preferred the old stone church to Verizon Hall (though one thing about old stone churches is that the actual performers get no feedback and have no idea how they sound which really sucks, but those churches do a very good job at covering up sub-par performances). But, it's just a preference, and both have their merits (though one is very certainly more accurate). Verizon Hall isn't deficient because it's accurate, and it isn't deficient because it allows you to hear the instruments and not the room. Just as the HD800's may not be to your liking, doesn't mean that it's deficient in any way. You prefer the stone church, but that doesn't mean other people don't love modern concert halls, and it doesn't mean modern concert halls are "bad".
 

I for one actually appreciate technical superiority on a headphone. Technicality does matter, though I'd agree, it isn't everything. But it does matter and definitely contributes to my enjoyment of something.

If you think about sports or live music performances, for instance. We marvel at a player's or musician's technical ability. It adds to our enjoyment of the sport or concert. I view it the same way with headphones.

 
I definitely do experience this as well, also the ability to hear music at such a high resolution provides its own enjoyment.

 

[Thenewguy007]

   
Need to clarify, sometimes it's not easy to be precise with my words in the videos...mostly done in one take, donchaknow.
 
Professionally, I can't be without an HD 800, so it's the most important headphone to me in my work.
 
But personally, I'd take the HE-1000 for listening pleasure.

 
Does the HE-1000 provide any sub-bass rumble/impact?
 
Compared to the Fostex TH900, the rumble on the HD800 is more of a small thud.

 

[Wildcatsare1]

Does the HE-1000 provide any sub-bass rumble/impact?

Compared to the Fostex TH900, the rumble on the HD800 is more of a small thud.

I really liked the HEK, but as a compliment to my HD800. I strongly prefer both to the TH900, just didn't sound natural to me.

 

[TMRaven]

Thanks for the directions on the HD800 mod tyll.  Now the Hd800 is both warmer and more detailed.

 

[Thenewguy007]

I really liked the HEK, but as a compliment to my HD800. I strongly prefer both to the TH900, just didn't sound natural to me.

Strangely enough, I did one of the mods for the TH900 based off the Anax mod & it drastically improved the sound.

 

[ubs28]

  I have been deciding on the best DAC for my HD800s if choosing from the models available to me here in the UK.  Today I auditioned the HDVD800 and the Hugo.  Posting here to add my experiences to those of others in case it is helpful to others making the same decision.
 
The HDVD800 was disappointing.  I found it 'darker' and less resolving than I had expected.  It is also smooth, and it might be appreciated by those who consider the HD800 too bright (I don't).  The comparison is with my long term main system DAC, the Weiss DAC-202.   It did have good bass energy/solidity but only fractionally more so, if at all, than the Weiss or the Hugo.  Thirty minutes and a wide range of material (pop, classical, small ensemble, large orchestra + choir, etc.) there was no contest.  Not the DAC for me.
 
By comparison the Hugo was amazing.  Very similar to the Weiss -- perhaps just the tiniest bit coarser on the high notes on some (and only some) tracks.  It might even be the streamer we were using at the hi-fi store.  I will post an update if I get the chance to audition the Hugo on my own specific system.  What the Hugo does have in spades is 'listenability'  -- I kept getting involved in the music and had to remind myself to move on to the next test.  I also found myself nodding and foot-tapping -- there is something wonderful, but a bit subliminal, about the way the Hugo invites you to engage with the music.  I suspect it has a lot to do with initial attack and superb timing but I defer to others in explaining the causes.  Let's face it, a DAC you do not want to give back is the sort of DAC makes you want to put your money down and take home.
 
Also auditioned the TT which, as others have said, is marginally better on some material.  Just a tad more resolving and also seems to smooth some of the aforementioned slight edge to some high frequencies.  The difference is very small -- small enough to ask yourself whether you would notice it once the new kit settled in and if so is it worth paying double the price?  I am wondering if the little bit of extra smoothness could be equalled in the Hugo with some USB filtering ...
 
Bottom line: looks like there is a Hugo in my future ... just need to digest all this -- and also see how the Mojo discussion settles, before making a move.
 
Big thanks to Marc at Audio T in Reading for arranging the afternoon and providing insights.  Recommended.
 
Cheers
 
Robert

Guess the Chord Hugo isn't as bad as people claim to be. I wasn't also very impressed by the HDVD800, I expected more to be honest based on how the Hugo sounds.

 

[SearchOfSub]

Eh, that's just the direction the headphone market is going now. People don't like treble anymore, and it really shows in many modern headphones. -50db at 13kHz? Holy crap! I work very hard to keep my ears in good shape so my range of hearing doesn't go down, I'd personally rather not lob 6+kHz off my range through a dark headphone. But, tastes differ, so it's now hard to find a headphone that doesn't sound like it has a big empty hole in the top end.

So you don't like the fact that the HD800 has quick decay and good instrument separation? And you prefer a more syrupy reverberant presentation? That's fine, but do know that if you have a problem with decay with the HD800's, your problem is with the recording and not the headphones. The HD800's quick decay and speed allows it to present the actual decay of the instruments accurately rather than adding decay on top and changing/lengthening the decay of the instrument. I'm guessing the reason you liken it to a "live performance" is that you're referencing performances that are done in rooms that are not properly acoustically treated, and so the reverberations of the headphones are reminding you of the reverberations of the room. And that's fine. When I used to perform, there were times where I preferred the old stone church to Verizon Hall (though one thing about old stone churches is that the actual performers get no feedback and have no idea how they sound which really sucks, but those churches do a very good job at covering up sub-par performances). But, it's just a preference, and both have their merits (though one is very certainly more accurate). Verizon Hall isn't deficient because it's accurate, and it isn't deficient because it allows you to hear the instruments and not the room. Just as the HD800's may not be to your liking, doesn't mean that it's deficient in any way. You prefer the stone church, but that doesn't mean other people don't love modern concert halls, and it doesn't mean modern concert halls are "bad".

Yep, too short - no decay and reverbs. Comparison to vocals - a 7 year old child singing vs. a proffesional adult singing with proper decay and reverbs from her voice when singing.


Pitch is not good - phrasing does not seem natural and musical at all. lol.

But really, it's just not musical, that's all.

 

[SearchOfSub]

I have been deciding on the best DAC for my HD800s if choosing from the models available to me here in the UK.  Today I auditioned the HDVD800 and the Hugo.  Posting here to add my experiences to those of others in case it is helpful to others making the same decision.

The HDVD800 was disappointing.  I found it 'darker' and less resolving than I had expected.  It is also smooth, and it might be appreciated by those who consider the HD800 too bright (I don't).  The comparison is with my long term main system DAC, the Weiss DAC-202.   It did have good bass energy/solidity but only fractionally more so, if at all, than the Weiss or the Hugo.  Thirty minutes and a wide range of material (pop, classical, small ensemble, large orchestra + choir, etc.) there was no contest.  Not the DAC for me.

By comparison the Hugo was amazing.  Very similar to the Weiss -- perhaps just the tiniest bit coarser on the high notes on some (and only some) tracks.  It might even be the streamer we were using at the hi-fi store.  I will post an update if I get the chance to audition the Hugo on my own specific system.  What the Hugo does have in spades is 'listenability'  -- I kept getting involved in the music and had to remind myself to move on to the next test.  I also found myself nodding and foot-tapping -- there is something wonderful, but a bit subliminal, about the way the Hugo invites you to engage with the music.  I suspect it has a lot to do with initial attack and superb timing but I defer to others in explaining the causes.  Let's face it, a DAC you do not want to give back is the sort of DAC makes you want to put your money down and take home.

Also auditioned the TT which, as others have said, is marginally better on some material.  Just a tad more resolving and also seems to smooth some of the aforementioned slight edge to some high frequencies.  The difference is very small -- small enough to ask yourself whether you would notice it once the new kit settled in and if so is it worth paying double the price?  I am wondering if the little bit of extra smoothness could be equalled in the Hugo with some USB filtering ...

Bottom line: looks like there is a Hugo in my future ... just need to digest all this -- and also see how the Mojo discussion settles, before making a move.

Big thanks to Marc at Audio T in Reading for arranging the afternoon and providing insights.  Recommended.

Cheers

Robert

Yep, Hugo is nice. You really stop thinking about upgrading once you have it.

 

[joespride]

Yep, too short - no decay and reverbs. Comparison to vocals - a 7 year old child singing vs. a proffesional adult singing with proper decay and reverbs from her voice when singing.


Pitch is not good - phrasing does not seem natural and musical at all. lol.

But really, it's just not musical, that's all.

 Certainly starting to seem as though you have an ax to grind ( a little payback for the dis like of the Hugo perhaps) or you are attempting to Draw someone in to a flame war....................Pretty sure everyone has seen your feelings on the HD800 as you have stated them a few times now